· Private foundation
The Lehman-Stamm Family Fund
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 63% of THE LEHMAN-STAMM FAMILY FUND’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k63 grants · $201k
- $10k–50k42 grants · $588k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $70k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICES | $70,000 |
| LAMBDA LEGAL | $37,500 |
| NORTHLIGHT THEATER | $25,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ILLINOIS | $25,000 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| NPR FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER | $20,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ILLINOIS | $20,000 |
| CHICAGO MEDIA PROJECT | $17,500 |
| HOWARD BROWN HEALTH CENTER | $15,000 |
| NEW ISRAEL FUND | $15,000 |
| WBEZ | $15,000 |
| ROGER BALDWIN FOUNDATION OF ACLU REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS PROJECT | $15,000 |
| BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $15,000 |
| CROSSROADS FUND | $15,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY23–25, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +28% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
118 repeat relationships — 58 still active in FY2025, 60 since wound down; 32 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $159k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- PPPlanned Parenthood of Illinois5× · 2020–2025 · $175k · revenue +77%
- LLLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC3× · 2023–2025 · $114k · revenue +41%
- ELENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST5× · 2020–2025 · $98k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- YEYWCA Evanston North Shoreone grant, 2019 · $22k
- YEYWCA EvanstonNorth Shoreone grant, 2021 · $21k · revenue -55%
- NPNational Public Housing Museumone grant, 2019 · $20k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
The chicago bar foundation brings the legal community together through advocacy, funding, and innovation to improve access to justice for people in need and to make the legal system more fair, equitable, and effective.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
At legal aid chicago, we work together to provide high quality civil legal aid to people living in poverty and other vulnerable groups.through advocacy, education, collaboration, and litigation we empower individuals, protect fundamental…
The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.
Equality illinois builds a better illinois by advancing equal treatment and social justice through education, advocacy and protection of the rights of the lgbt community.
Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.
The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…
Secure racial equity and economic opportunity for all
To attract, recruit, advance, and retain attorneys of color in the twin cities through education and collaboration with member organizations.
A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth.
The human rights campaign foundation is organized for the charitable and educational purposes of promoting public education and welfare for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (lgbtq+) community. the hrc foundation envisions…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Connections for the Homeless Inc and the most unlike its peers is Tent Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
105 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 105 of the 261 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Planned Parenthood of Illinois ↗
- Who funds THE ROGER BALDWIN FOUNDATION OF ACLU INC ↗
- Who funds LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST ↗
- Who funds CROSSROADS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Evanston Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds The National Public Housing Museum ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW ISRAEL FUND ↗
- Who funds Howard Brown Health Center ↗
- Who funds NORTHLIGHT THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO MEDIA PROJECT ↗
- Who funds LAKE TANGANYIKA FLOATING HEALTH CLINIC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CENTER FOR LGBTQ RIGHTS FKA NATIONAL CENTER FOR LESBIAN RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds The Chicago Community Trust ↗
- Who funds SHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY FOR LAW & POLICY ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN ↗
- Who funds JAMES B MORAN CENTER FOR YOUTH ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds A JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Middlebury College ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Kellcie Fund · The Chicago Community Trust · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Field Foundation of Illinois · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Circle of Service Foundation · Lloyd a Fry Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Chicago Foundation for Women · Northwestern University · Joseph & Bessie Feinberg Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Lehman-Stamm Family Fund funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- President and Fellows of Middlebury College — 1% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Lehman-Stamm Family Fund?
Find your warmest path to The Lehman-Stamm Family Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.